This is a topic I've been struggling with lately as I've been working on a project of my own, and I'm anxious to hear what this forum has to say on the topic:
What does everyone think of the abundance (perhaps excess?) of magic that can work its way into a D&D campaign, particularly one that advances beyond 9th or 10th level.
It seems the Wizards and Sorcerers often become so powerful they rendor the specialized abilities and powers of other classes useless. (Why have the Rogue disarm the trap if the Wizard can turn it to mud, or has stoneskin and can take the damage?)
I'm in the process of running (and writing) a campaign in which magic is quite a bit "dumbed down". Its a world where wizards and sorcerers are few and far between and no one is wading into battle against 8 Frost Giants because their shooting fireballs from their eyes, and bolts of lightning from their arse!
Braveheart quotes aside...what does everyone think about the amount of magic in games. Does it inspire better roleplaying and make things more fun for the players, or does it eventually turn the game into who can best utilize a spell to accomplish anything?
Thoughts?
Creative Director
|
It seems the Wizards and Sorcerers often become so powerful they rendor the specialized abilities and powers of other classes useless. (Why have the Rogue disarm the trap if the Wizard can turn it to mud, or has stoneskin and can take the damage?)
Of course, the reverse holds just as true. Why should the sorcerer or wizard bother wasting or even preparing a spell to turn a trap to mud when a rogue can just disarm it with a single skill check?
I think that the classes are, for the most part, fairly balanced. It's been my experience, in fact, that the wizard class ends up being one of the more underpowered classes in long-running campaigns. They're the only class, after all, who has to spend money and XP to use their abilities and bonus feats. When any other class levels up, they're ready to go immediately. The wizard, on the other hand, has to spend time and money scribing spells into his spellbook, or has to spend time and money and XP building magic items to justify any Item Creation feats he might have taken. Oh, and then there's familiars, who cost money to get and cost XP to lose.
I certainly think that in 3rd edition, the usefullness of non-spellcasting characters has increased dramatically. In prior editions, the problem you describe above was even worse.
They're the only class, after all, who has to spend money and XP to use their abilities and bonus feats.
And I suppose fighers are born with spiked chains in their hands?
;)Not to disagree with your point though. The more I play, the more I find that the classes (the core classes anyway) are fairly well-balanced.
Of course, the reverse holds just as true. Why should the sorcerer or wizard bother wasting or even preparing a spell to turn a trap to mud when a rogue can just disarm it with a single skill check?I think that the classes are, for the most part, fairly balanced.
Perhaps...and I realize generalizations are dangerous...its the players the classes draw who aren't as fairly balanced. :) I know I've hosted many more Wizard and Sorcerer players who are a bit more aggressive and...efficient?...than the other players.
There's a certain flair to using magic which requires a bit of charisma and bravado (which the Sorcerer class actually asks for)...and as such, it seems the less-subtle, more pro-active players are drawn to these classes.
Overall, James, I agree with you. I think the classes are quite well balanced in 3E...but I'd wager that "Perfect Self" or "Improved Evasion" pale in comparison to 6 7th level spells per day. :)
-Rob
|
Creative Director
|
And I suppose fighers are born with spiked chains in their hands?
They're the only class, after all, who has to spend money and XP to use their abilities and bonus feats.
Well, no... but they don't have to pay "licensing fees" to use their chains when they find new ones in adventures, which is generally what finding a new spell on a scroll means to a wizard. And fighters don't lose XP if a bad die roll kills their spiked chain.
~they don't have to pay "licensing fees" to use their chains when they find new ones in adventures, which is generally what finding a new spell on a scroll means to a wizard. And fighters don't lose XP if a bad die roll kills their spiked chain.
To me, it's not the prescence of magic per se that imbalances a game - mages and sorcerors can hold their own, based on feats and spell selection, as well as any other class... What I've seen throw a game out of whack is how a proliferation of uber-magic items can destabilize the balance.
An encounter with equal CR parties and monsters can be cut down to two rounds with the use of a certain item on either side...a steep CR for a party can be equalized...
...which is why I keep any item with a value higher than +3 under tight controls; most of these high-power magic items are in the ownership of those persons/monsters who value them, likely earned them through great efforts, would NEVER dream of selling them (for any price) and are even more likely to defend them to their death before giving them up.
In 25 years of D&D playing, I've never seen ONCE a single player or party willing to sell their best magic item to a complete stranger for a sack of gold; any NPC or monster would react the same way.
M
It seems the Wizards and Sorcerers often become so powerful they rendor the specialized abilities and powers of other classes useless. (Why have the Rogue disarm the trap if the Wizard can turn it to mud, or has stoneskin and can take the damage?)I'm in the process of running (and writing) a campaign in which magic is quite a bit "dumbed down". Its a world where wizards and sorcerers are few and far between and no one is wading into battle against 8 Frost Giants because their shooting fireballs from their eyes, and bolts of lightning from their arse!
Hopefully, the Wizard in your example has a rogue in the party to find the trap in the first place before he stumbles into it, OR casting a spell on a trap doesn't spontaneously set it off.
Plus, if those Frost Giants ambush the lone Wizard, he's a dead man before he gets a spell off. A high level fighter, barbarian, ranger, rogue, druid - have a much better chance. The fighter classes can take the hits, and the outdoor classes will probably see the ambush coming. . .
Do you ever put them up against creatures with Spell Resistance? That'll make them pray for a fighter class real quick, eh?
On the other hand, I think a low-magic campaign would be really cool. Have you read George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire? When there IS magic in that series, it's rare and regarded with mystery and awe.
Your idea sounds pretty intriguing. Lemme us know how it goes.
On the other hand, I think a low-magic campaign would be really cool. Have you read George R.R. Martin's Song of Ice and Fire? When there IS magic in that series, it's rare and regarded with mystery and awe.
Your idea sounds pretty intriguing. Lemme us know how it goes.
I haven't read the George RR Martin book, but its worth the look. I could always use additional reference material.
As for letting you know how it goes...things have gone well so far. I keep a running log of the adventure in the Campaign Journals section of this site. The header is "Storytelling My New Campaign"
Thanks for the input!
-Rob
|
I really would like to believe the classes are balanced out- I watch my (near munchkin) player w/ a Gnome Sorceror/Archmage transform into a Solar w/ Shapechange, or a Choker during a Time Stop for 2-10 spells... that's when I have problems believing they are balanced. I know, I know- some players are ridiculous in their powergaming ways, but between him and the cleric thamurturgist, the "never-missing," "always ready" monk/paladin, fighter/tempest, and Half-dragon fighter seem to pale in comparison.
Quick question on that note: Can a player "ready" a spell as a std. action w/ a round "acquired" by a Time Stop spell? I.E. essentially regaining the std. action used to cast the Time Stop (albeit w/ several more spells running)?
I watch my (near munchkin) player w/ a Gnome Sorceror/Archmage transform into a Solar w/ Shapechange, or a Choker during a Time Stop for 2-10 spells... that's when I have problems believing they are balanced.
IMHO, the whole game breaks to pieces after about 12th level, particularly with the wizards/sorcerers. This post is a good example.
|
Creative Director
|
Shapechange has been errataed—you can't assume the form of a creature with more hit dice than your level now. So you'd have to be a 22nd level character to shape into a solar.
The choker situation is dicier. I'd say that a choker is pretty much the best choice for shapechange, since it lets you use that supernatural speed to cast an extra spell each round. That's a problem with the way shapechange works, though, not with the wizard or sorcerer class.
I think that the while the game stays relatively balanced all the way up to 20th level, it does get more complex. The problem with high level PCs isn't their power as much as it is with their options; they've got so many resources that it can be difficult to plan challenging adventures for them.
Of course... anything that the PCs come up with, the DM can use on his side of the screen as well.
I think that the while the game stays relatively balanced all the way up to 20th level, it does get more complex. The problem with high level PCs isn't their power as much as it is with their options; they've got so many resources that it can be difficult to plan challenging adventures for them.
Of course... anything that the PCs come up with, the DM can use on his side of the screen as well.
And, don't underestimate the power of foresight... if you know what your players will do, hit them where they aren't looking. Use the terrain to your advantage, for example. On average, my finding (after 25 years of running games) is that most parties hold up very well when you hit them with an encounter they are geared for, hold up okay if they have sort of thought through that type of encounter, and completely loose it when you disrupt their core capabilities. Sucker them into committing before you change the game on them...
I'm really with you that 3rd ed is too magic rich. I'm moving my group from Greyhawk to Wheel of Time and disallowing the PCs to play Initiates/Wilders to combat this phenom. As far as Wizards/Sorcerors go, I've found that if the game starts at 1st level, fewer players are willing to play one. As few have the stamina and hp to make it to 9th. Most of the time, they cross class to fighter, barbarian or rogue to get some Hit points, saves or BaB. It's only when a game starts at a higher level that someone will jump on a power hungry sorceror. That gives me the rationalization that truly powerful wizards/sorcerors are VERY few and far between. Another view I have is that wizards/sorcerors are to d&d, what radio operators were in viet nam.....prime targets. High mortality rates! Finally, should I STILL have a dominant spell caster in my group, I focus on the required sleep and spell components to keep him/her/it in line. No sleepy...no casty! Lots of nocturnal visitors, bed bugs, and irritable familiars can keep a wizard from getting the required eight hours to be able to study.
Shapechange
The choker situation is dicier. I'd say that a choker is pretty much the best choice for shapechange, since it lets you use that supernatural speed to cast an extra spell each round. That's a problem with the way shapechange works, though, not with the wizard or sorcerer class.
I never noticed this paticular combination before. I just looked up the spell, the entry in the MM, and I can't find a loophole. Nasty.
In either case, there's no reason an individual DM can't have his/her own errata to make it a little more difficult. I have a few sugesstions:
1. To cast spells during shapechage, you need the appropriate Wild Shape feat.
2. If you want to cast spells, the base creature has to have body parts capable of the verbal/somatic components that the caster is used to - if the creature doesn't speak a language analogous with the caster (in the Chocker's case, the caster must already know Undercommon), they can't cast spells unless they are using a Silenced Spell. If the creature doesn't have a humanoid shape, then the caster must use Still Spell.
3. Spellcasting requires certain cranial lobes in the brain, or a specific series of alaogous shapes, etc. The base creature MUST have a minimun Inteiigence or Charisma (based on the caster) in order for the caster to be able to use spells in the form. A 10 is required for 0-level spells, so a base creature must have a 10 in it's Inteligence or Charisma for the caster to use spells.
4. The Shape Change entry says you can't use your own supernatural abilities. Extend this to say supernatural abilities, spell-like abilitities, or spells. You can, however, dispell the Shapechange as a free action.
5. Say "no." After all, the Haste spell was changed, because getting an extra spell with the standard action was not the spirit of the spell. Shpaechanging into a chocker for the supernatural quickness was not the spirit of the spell, and it shouldn't be tolerated regardless of what the rules say.
Okay, gotta go to work.
|
|
I'll have to check the errata on that... in true rules-lawyering fashion, this player only tends to read what benefits him best... At least I knew about the 2x HD rule being removed, and I'm glad to know my gut instinct re: HD and CL were correct.
As for the choker, the downsides are a much reduced Con score, and being counted as a 3 HD creature for all spells... like good old Eyebite or (most esp.) the "Word" spells at 7th cleric level- i.e. the instant kill ones which I believe even dodge Death Ward, being that they also destroy undead. By the time they have Shapechange, Blasphemy is rather common...
I also require them to have ranks in the requisite Knowledge score equal to the creature's HD (i.e. identifiable w/ a 10 on a D20 roll), in order for them to take the forms via Shapechange. The alternative is for them (in-game) to have spent several hours studying the creature's full capabilities- which means they have fought one, or it has been Planar Ally/Gated in for a long-term effect. This way, familiarity has been shown, and they can't just pick-and-choose through my vast creature library w/o having fought one.
Sorcerors are more limited by the rule, as they don't have the Int score to obtain the plethora of Knowledges (or the skill list to do so), while the Wizard cannot cast it as much, but has a better chance of having a great variety of forms to choose from based on his skills. Since they apparently can't exceed their own HD, this bolsters my "rank rule"
Thanks guys, I appreciate the advice. :) (now to explain he can't be a solar in the final session of the campaign... I can handle that ;))
I also require them to have ranks in the requisite Knowledge score equal to the creature's HD (i.e. identifiable w/ a 10 on a D20 roll), in order for them to take the forms via Shapechange. The alternative is for them (in-game) to have spent several hours studying the creature's full capabilities- which means they have fought one, or it has been Planar Ally/Gated in for a long-term effect. This way, familiarity has been shown, and they can't just pick-and-choose through my vast creature library w/o having fought one.
Oh, I like this one... the spell description DOES say you must have familiarity, and that can truly help limit things wthout having any rules change.
After rereading my earlier post regarding the choker, I though of an even better #6: Add a sentence in chapter 10 of the PH that says "Only one spell can be cast per round, regardless of the number of extra standard actions gained though supernatural or spell-Like abilities." Note that this rule allows for quickened spells,but not the Choker thing.
Plus, you don't change the spell, or its requirements.
Also, notice that I spelled Choker corectly this time. :)
|
|
*nods* Not a bad change to the choker.
I just checked the 3.5 errata, nad it only mentions the
50 HD --> 25 HD cap. I'd be incredibly appreciative if someone (James?) could point me to the creature HD equals your own rule. I remember that for Polymorph, but I don't remember a comparison of the two being made along that line.
Again, I'd appreciate the assist. :)
|
Creative Director
|
*nods* Not a bad change to the choker.
I just checked the 3.5 errata, nad it only mentions the
50 HD --> 25 HD cap. I'd be incredibly appreciative if someone (James?) could point me to the creature HD equals your own rule. I remember that for Polymorph, but I don't remember a comparison of the two being made along that line.Again, I'd appreciate the assist. :)
Actually, it's even more restrictive than that...
"The assumed form cannot have more than your caster level in Hit Dice (to a maximum of 25 HD)."
At least, that's what my errata tells me...
At least, that's what my errata tells me...
Here is a link to the section of updated SRD that covers shapechange:
http://www.wizards.com/d20/files/v35/SpellsS.rtf
And here is the quote
This spell functions like polymorph, except that it enables you to assume the form of any single nonunique creature (of any type) from Fine to Colossal size. The assumed form cannot have more than your caster level in Hit Dice (to a maximum of 25 HD).
fears his topic may have fallen victim to a tangent of uncertain HD and CR...If only I had a 20th level Wizard!
:)
|
|
*Feeling bad for potentially derailing thread*
Well, I've actually had similar thoughts and am exploring the concept in two ways:
First, running a high-level (15th) gestalt game w/ newer players- it's a limited scope, as it's a dungeon crawl, but less powergaming has helped lessen my concerns re: high magic levels.
Second, during this summer, I am running a low-magic game where only 1/2 of your levels can be devoted to advancing in a caster class (Two magical classes is acceptable, but no PrC permitted to take advanatge of this, ala Mystic Theurge/True Necromancer/ Arcane Heirophant). Can't say I have results yet, though w/ only 3 levels, I'm seeing a Ranger, a Monk, and a Druid/Rogue so far... the lack of civilization has promoted more "rugged" classes as a whole.
I think it honestly depends on your game as well: If you have a game where gods do not effect the plane, and they lack followers, the healing gap is likely filled by the "side" classes: Bards and Rangers (excluding Paladins & even Druids for above reason). This can work fine, (even if you go so far as to reduce it to just Bards) but you may notice a shift in the challenges of certain fights, esp. when your party tangles with Undead- the durability of these creatures at low levels is negated by turning, and their special attacks are going to be nasty w/o the Death Wards or Restorations.
In my summer game, I plan on avoiding outsiders almost altogether- as I believe the DMG states, fights w/ outsiders are more difficult w/o arcanists, as their special abilities/DR/generally high ACs are going to make them tricky for the group to handle. *shrug* Good luck w/ your own "playtesting."
Braveheart quotes aside...what does everyone think about the amount of magic in games. Does it inspire better roleplaying and make things more fun for the players, or does it eventually turn the game into who can best utilize a spell to accomplish anything?
Thoughts?
robjbane -
The game has balance, but whether that balance plays well can depend on your players. Are they die hard roleplayers who will throw themselves into a role and work with what will best fit their character? Or are they power gamers who will find and exploit any chance miswording in a rule?
I think it would be possible to play a very effective low magic game, but I'm not sure a low magic game will help your problem. The available abilities in the game is not what inspires good role-playing, it's the desires of the players that do that. On the other hand, restrictions (whether imposed or willingly accepted) often help bring out excellence in role-playing (see the thread about Mike McArtor's mute ninja character in the Campaign Journals section for a good non-rules related example of this).
- Ashavan
|
I have an arcane spellcaster in my group whom I would say qualifies as a "power gamer" -- looking for every possible rule interpretation that can benefit him and willing to argue it to the death!
However, I don't think there's too much magic; I think it's easy for the DM to allow too many magic *items*. This is especially easy given all of the ruleset changes -- a ring of spell storing was cheap in 2nd Ed AD&D, but became quite expensive in 3.0 and even more in 3.5; how does one handle the transition in-game? No, I have a solution so I don't really need one, but thanks for offering! :)
-- a ring of spell storing was cheap in 2nd Ed AD&D, but became quite expensive in 3.0 and even more in 3.5; how does one handle the transition in-game? No, I have a solution so I don't really need one, but thanks for offering! :)
My solution (no worries Azhrei, this isnt technically a "solution" to the problem, but you didn't want that anyway!) for any situation like the Ring o' Spell Storin' or any magic items in the game is fairly simple...They ARE NOT FOR SALE!
But even if they were, I don't give out gold by the thousands either. My line to players along this track has always been simple and to the point:
"This ain't Diablo! You want the gold, you want the magic weapons? You'd better find the evil individual (or dragon) FAR more powerful than you who has been holding this stuff and come up with a crafty way to either defeat him or con him out of his stuff."
Now this next part of my argument is definitly on a downward slope, and yes, it is quite slippery, but in the interest of practical reasoning for the non-selling of magical items:
(my prices will be off as I'm not well versed in the cost of magic items for all the reasons above, so let me slide on the accuracy of numbers for the sake of landing my point)
A Ring of Improved Invisibility is 35,000 Gold. Odds of a merchant in Suzail, or Tantras, or Waterdeep having one of these *could* be reasonable as they are huge, magic-centric cities, but you've got to ask yourself, "why, if this merchant has this item, is he selling it in his street shop? And why, hasn't some 12th level Rogue come and cleaned this guy out?"
Are merchants who carry magical weapons as items for sale all wizards with Iron Golems, or is Brinks Security more popular in Faerun than I thought? Who runs that anyhow? Probably a company in Calimport...sounds like their kind of thing.
-Rob